JUSTICE LEAGUE movie

[TheObsoleteMan]

Why don't they let the folks who handle their cartoon movies produce the live stuff? Those are generally very good quality. At least they understand the material.

 

[Viking Spawn]

Fixed.

__

Fat chance in hell. They're going to have a team movie full of actors playing parts people have zero investment in. That's going up against an established franchise that set the gold standard, repeatedly, for superhero movies. I don't even think they could pull it off with Nolan and Bale involved.

I think its suicide for DC to go head to head against an Avengers sequel who currently will have all of the momentum. I would love to see a JL movie work, but I think its sounding too rushed already and WB may kill it before it ever gets a legit chance.

 

[thenammagazine]

I think they're afraid of being compared to Marvel if they build up the universe. The stupid thing is, they're already being compared to Marvel by fast-tracking a JLA film, so why not just eat it and take the necessary time to do it right? DC has the more iconic heroes and there's the potential to nuke Marvel from orbit if handled with kid gloves. But so far, bailing on a GL2, the possibility of not using Blake for the Batman reboot and the iffy nature of the upcoming MoS all but spell disaster for a team flick as good or bad, they're castrating any chance of movie-goer investment in characters they've already established.

 

[Buttmunch]

Yeah, JL is going to bomb hard. Only Nolan and Timm combined could save this movie if they go foward as planned. WB doesn't get why the Avengers worked. They slowly built up that universe. WB is thinking: Superman, check. JL time!



People need to know what Aquaman and the Flash can do on their own before joining a team. I think people know enough about Supes, Bat, WW, and now GL to get by. Sure Aquaman is a water guy, and Flash is fast, but I think thats about all people know

On the one hand I want this to do well so we get more DC films, but on the other hand I want it to fail just so WB can see they can't cash in on a team up movie without laying the ground work. Marvel took its time and it paid off big. If WB wants that to happen, they need to take their time too.

 

[batfan08]

Or the flip side, they dump $200mil into it expecting it to be their "Avengers," do a horrible, halfassed misinterpretation of every hero in their rush to get it out and it and it literally kills any and all franchises attached to it. If there's anything WB doesn't understand, it's their superheroes.

Touché, and I do agree about them wanting to distance themselves from the "Marvel way", but, while I do agree that they should handle it with care, I don't think that a pre-existing universe is necessary for a JL film to succeed (this part isn't directed towards you, nam). As I said before, DC has the advantage of name recognition. Go back to, say, 2006, and ask your average joe about Iron Man and The Flash. If he knows who Iron Man is, you got lucky, but the odds are that he can probably tell you that The Flash runs fast, and Aquaman talks to fish. If they have a basic knowledge of what those characters can do, they'll be alright, and WB could use the JL film as a spring board for the individual properties. I guess we just have to wait and see. Like you said, it could be a dream come true, or it could be a living nightmare; I pray it's the former.

 

[intothevoid]

I think there's more than one way to skin a cat. (don't worry jyecat, not skinning you... yet).

Avengers worked great the way they built it up. But that's not the only way to successfully do a super-hero teamup film.

Sure JLA could bomb bad but if it does IMO it won't be because of this approach of going right into it post MoS, it would be because of bad writing, casting or acting or a combination thereof.

 

[Kamandi]

They risk by having all of these characters introduced within one film it feels like SNL very quickly. There's going to be a lot of "Wonder Woman, good of you to help!" "All in a day's work Martian Manhunter!" "Look, here comes Flash!"

Marvel solved that problem with a bit of patience and planning. They made a few bucks along the way too.

 

[Khev]

The first X-Men movie did show that you could just start with a team movie and do reasonably well and that was with a so so budget and no superhero costumes.

 

[thenammagazine]

Touché, and I do agree about them wanting to distance themselves from the "Marvel way", but, while I do agree that they should handle it with care, I don't think that a pre-existing universe is necessary for a JL film to succeed (this part isn't directed towards you, nam). As I said before, DC has the advantage of name recognition. Go back to, say, 2006, and ask your average joe about Iron Man and The Flash. If he knows who Iron Man is, you got lucky, but the odds are that he can probably tell you that The Flash runs fast, and Aquaman talks to fish. If they have a basic knowledge of what those characters can do, they'll be alright, and WB could use the JL film as a spring board for the individual properties. I guess we just have to wait and see. Like you said, it could be a dream come true, or it could be a living nightmare; I pray it's the former.

They want an Avengers level film. They don't want it to be compared to Avengers, but expect that level of $$$ from a JLA film (it's retarded if you think about it). And there's no way they're going to get that kind of box office without build-up, name recognition or no.

The first X-Men movie did show that you could just start with a team movie and do reasonably well and that was with a so so budget and no superhero costumes.

That was still introducing characters that most of the movie-going audience was unfamiliar with.

 

[karamazov80]

Why don't they let the folks who handle their cartoon movies produce the live stuff? Those are generally very good quality. At least they understand the material.

The executives lack the wisdom to understand this simple fact. . .and I assume you are referring to the original animated stuff, and not the unnecessary, derivative comic adaptations like Year One and Dark Knight Returns.

They risk by having all of these characters introduced within one film it feels like SNL very quickly. There's going to be a lot of "Wonder Woman, good of you to help!" "All in a day's work Martian Manhunter!" "Look, here comes Flash!"

Marvel solved that problem with a bit of patience and planning. They made a few bucks along the way too.

The first X-Men movie did show that you could just start with a team movie and do reasonably well and that was with a so so budget and no superhero costumes.

I agree with Khev. The big problem would be that the execs would feel compelled to do origins and exposition. But X-Men didn't have that cynical view of movie-goers that they needed to be hand-held and to have all these things explained to them in grueling detail via movies based on each individual character first. Would Avengers have been the success it was without the prior movies? No way. But if the first Marvel U movie was the Avengers, without any of the other backstory previously explored, it still would have been an awesome movie. People would have understood very clearly what was going on, and it would have still made mega-bucks (maybe not $1 billion, but megabucks nonetheless). JL could do the same. I agree with void that this can work with an approach different than the Avengers. But it would take execs with good sense and faith in viewers, and based on what they crapped out in Green Lantern, I don't know that they have either of those things.

 

[Kamandi]

Why call it JLA?

WB should just title it "Batman, Superman and the Other Guys" They aren't going to give equal screen time to Flash or MM, if they appear at all.

 

[Khev]

But if the first Marvel U movie was the Avengers, without any of the other backstory previously explored, it still would have been an awesome movie.

That's a good point. A great movie is a great movie. If Avengers was ever released "as is" with no separate lead-ins it'd still be the same spectacular movie.

Star Wars introduced a ton of previously unknown characters that became instant icons, it's all about the execution.

Why call it JLA?

WB should just title it "Batman, Superman and the Other Guys" They aren't going to give equal screen time to Flash or MM, if they appear at all.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that they're going to call it the Justice League because that's the name of the team and it sounds cool and "Batman, Superman and the Other Guys" sounds stupid. Just a hunch though.

 

[thenammagazine]

I agree with Khev. The big problem would be that the execs would feel compelled to do origins and exposition. But X-Men didn't have that cynical view of movie-goers that they needed to be hand-held and to have all these things explained to them in grueling detail via movies based on each individual character first. Would Avengers have been the success it was without the prior movies? No way. But if the first Marvel U movie was the Avengers, without any of the other backstory previously explored, it still would have been an awesome movie. People would have understood very clearly what was going on, and it would have still made mega-bucks (maybe not $1 billion, but megabucks nonetheless). JL could do the same. I agree with void that this can work with an approach different than the Avengers. But it would take execs with good sense and faith in viewers, and based on what they crapped out in Green Lantern, I don't know that they have either of those things.

The simple basic problem with this though is that they're not so much looking at establishing a good foundation to build from as they are in capitalizing off of a grandios Avengers box office. The problem is, they don't see that it's one and the same. Hell, even Fox is looking to capitalize off of it by toying with the idea of incorporating FF with X-Men.

 

[Kamandi]

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that they're going to call it the Justice League because that's the name of the team and it sounds cool and "Batman, Superman and the Other Guys" sounds stupid. Just a hunch though.

You need new batteries in your sarcasm detector.

 

[Khev]

You need new batteries in your sarcasm detector.

Sometimes it amuses me to respond to sarcasm in a way that makes the original poster look like an idiot if I think their sarcasm is unwarranted.

Well of course they aren't going to give equal screen time to everyone. *Somebody's* got to be the Hawkeye and BW of the group, and no it isn't going to be Superman or Batman.

 

[Kamandi]

Hell, even Fox is looking to capitalize off of it by toying with the idea of incorporating FF with X-Men.

THIS will work. I'd even like to see them introduce Reed in First Class 2. With 2 FF films already out there Fox is in a position WB is not. They could get away with introducing a new FF within an Xmen film or just go straight to the crossover.

 

[Niltusk]

It doesn't have to be all just Superman/Batman plus some side characters. Flash needs to be developed, he rocks peoples socks and with CGI what it is now, not to mention 3D, he could just blow people away. They need to throw crazy money at Fassbender and have him do it, I have long envisioned him as being the Flash prototype in much the same way RDJ was the perfect pick for Iron Man.
Flash vs Reverse Flash onscreen with a great director is a money maker and then they could use this to help promote a Justice League movie.

 

[Viking Spawn]

The Fass as "the Flash?" Ohhh, I think that would work! Nice casting there Niltusk!!!

As for the JL being introduced with an X-Men approach.... Its possible if done right. However, WB better hope their next Superman film succeeds.... If they keep burning their characters, (Like Superman returns - not a bad film but not great, and GL), people may not want to keep going back for more. Whether its different or not.

 

[Niltusk]

The Fass as "the Flash?" Ohhh, I think that would work! Nice casting there Niltusk!!!

As for the JL being introduced with an X-Men approach.... Its possible if done right. However, WB better hope their next Superman film succeeds.... If they keep burning their characters, (Like Superman returns - not a bad film but not great, and GL), people may not want to keep going back for more. Whether its different or not.

DC currently has 2 characters developed that I am invested in and one of them is in a TV series for christ sakes.
They seem to do much better at managing their heroes that don't have powers.

 

[Kamandi]

They seem to do much better at managing their heroes that don't have powers.

*cough*smallville*cough*


Smallville was a mess. They made a Superman TV show and hid him being Superman. We'll see if Arrow turns out better over time.